Andrew ,'Damage'
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
Which is more relevant experience to the position? Which do you feel like you will click with day to day?
I suspect from what you've said earlier that Candidate A is the superior candidate, but your main objection to her is the rehiring process. However, you have no guarantee that Candidate B will stick with you for the two years, so I think you should lessen that as your criteria and gauge the workers on how they will be for you doing the job.
I would have said Candidate B, because three months isn't worth it. Unless Candidate A has actually worked for your office before? Then she'd need less training.
I suspect from what you've said earlier that Candidate A is the superior candidate, but your main objection to her is the rehiring process. However, you have no guarantee that Candidate B will stick with you for the two years, so I think you should lessen that as your criteria and gauge the workers on how they will be for you doing the job.
You are right. The other problem I have is that I am afraid I am screwing over my relationship with the research department by not sharing a student with them-- which I often do in the summer when students can work 40 hours a week.
What makes you think you'd be screwing over your relationship? Had you already committed to doing so?
And hiring either of these students would not solve that, right?
Candidate B is research's student currently-- they can't guarantee her more than 10 hours and she wants 20. The student that I fired was also their student (and still works for them). When they found out my issues with her, they lent me Candidate B for a few days, and she was just fine (although I did not really train her)
smonster email me your address please.
polgara, email me your sister's address again, thanks.
My reading of it leans significantly towards candidate B. What am I missing? Why is candidate A still so strongly in the running? Maybe that will help.
My 27/279th deployment just got moved out two weeks. I had to ask a million times to make sure it wasn't an IT issue (because that's my fault, and the developers have been taunting me that we won't make it), but it's not! It's purely a business call, because I would have dragged the entire IT department (QA included, even though they're not my team) kicking and screaming into a end of the month installation.
I hate to be relieved, but it's totally easier this way.
And it seems like the new guy I had to interact with (new to me, not to the company) is giving me props, so even though he's changing everything, it will work. As I said, kicking and screaming if required.
(I love that the PM seemed to be on IT's side, even though he's a general PM, not the IT PM. That's the sort of thing I want to cultivate. Not that there are sides, just the team solidarity. I want to form teams all the time. It's my current work thing.)
Dita! Have you found her yet? Don't lose your shit. You will need it.
My reading of it leans significantly towards candidate B. What am I missing? Why is candidate A still so strongly in the running? Maybe that will help.
Because I am so backed up with work, I need someone to unbury me, and I feel like she will need little direction-- I can just hand her my mess and she will fix it for me. In my experience, only exceptional sophomores can figure out a job within parameters, but without specific instruction.
And is the *definite* short term part of it worth it? I mean, knowing you'll have to redo the process in a few months?
On the other hand, an investment in training time for the sophomore will give you longer term help without having to go through the hiring process again.